Sons of God and daughters of Men
- Thread starter Vinodkumar
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
You know as well as us that there are only 2 places in in the Bible that use the term bene elohim. First in Genesis 6, 2nd in Job.
Since we KNOW humans weren't present when the Earth was Created, YOU need to show US where that term is used for humans.
Also, this idea that Job was standing there when God and satan were having their discussion might be the most ludicrous thing I've read in the 6 yrs I've been here.
Since we KNOW humans weren't present when the Earth was Created, YOU need to show US where that term is used for humans.
Also, this idea that Job was standing there when God and satan were having their discussion might be the most ludicrous thing I've read in the 6 yrs I've been here.
-
1
- Show all
It is from the Codex Alexindrinus:
Here is just one of the men, with his credentials, that follow the angelic view. I must reiterate that there is NOTHING to suggest the beings in Genesis 6 are human. The text ITSELF distinguishes human women from the beings that took them and mated with them.
Think how utterly silly it would be to say Seth's sons mated with Cain's daughters, and that union created Giants and mighty men.
Dr. Elmer Towns
Dr. Elmer Towns is a college and seminary professor, an author of popular and scholarly works (the editor of two encyclopedias), a popular seminar lecturer, and dedicated worker in Sunday school, and has developed over 20 resource packets for leadership education.His personal education includes a B.S. from Northwestern College in Minneapolis, Minnesota, a M.A. from Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, a Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary also in Dallas, a MRE from Garrett Theological Seminary in Evanston, Illinois, and a D.Min. from Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California.He is co-founder of Liberty University, with Jerry Falwell, in 1971, and was the only full-time teacher in the first year of Liberty’s existence. Today, the University has over 11,400 students on campus with 39,000 in the Distance Learning Program (now Liberty University Online), and he is the Dean of the School of Religion.Dr. Towns has given theological lectures and taught intensive seminars at over 50 theological seminaries in America and abroad. He holds visiting professorship rank in five seminaries. He has written over 2,000 reference and/or popular articles and received six honorary doctoral degrees. Four doctoral dissertations have analyzed his contribution to religious education and evangelism.
Posting again for those who are confused about this:
WERE THE “SONS OF GOD” FALLEN ANGELS?
Several Bible teachers believe that the “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2) which were angels, cohabited with the “daughters of men” (Gen. 6:2), who were human women and produced giants (v. 4). God saw the wicked results, as well as potential ruin and destroyed the earth with a flood. The angels who were responsible were placed in Tartarus to wait for judgment at the Great White Throne judgment. Lawlor gives support for this view.
The Sons of God
The title “sons of God” in Genesis 6:2,4 is used in Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 to designate angels. Moreover, in the Septuagint the word “sons” in these passages is the Greek for “angels,” and where the Authorized Version reads “sons of God” in Geneses 6:2,4 the Septuagint reads “angels of God.” Nowhere in the Old Testament are God’s people called “sons of God,” with one notable exception in Hosea 1:10, and the meaning there is obvious.
The term “sons of God” denotes beings brought into existence by the creative act of God. Such were the angels, and in the Old Testament the title refers to angels. Men are not “sons” until they are redeemed (Gal. 4:4,5), born again in the New Testament sense (Jn. 1:12,13; 3:3-7).
There was a strong Jewish stream of tradition with regard to Genesis 6:1-4 as being the description of a terrible sin committed by angels attracted by the beauty of mortal women, and who forsook their proper habitation in order to live on earth with the daughters of men.
The early church held that Jude’s statement in verse 6 refers to Genesis 6:1-4. It was not until the latter part of the fourth century that any other view was suggested.
The language of the text is foreign to the view that the “sons of God” are the sons of Seth, while the “daughters of men” are the offspring of Cain. If the “sons of God” are the sons of Seth, and the “daughters of men” are the offspring of Cain, then at the time of the amalgamation God’s true people were limited to the male sex, for the “sons of God” were the ones who married the “daughters of men.” And if the “sons of God” were believers, they perished in the Flood, yet Peter states that it was the ungodly who received that judgment (2 Pet. 2:5).
Daughters of Men
The “daughters of men” can surely be held to include the daughters of Seth as well as the daughters of Cain, and this being so, then the “sons of God” must refer to something entirely different from the human race.
The progeny of the union between the “sons of God” and the daughters of men” was of such a character as to indicate a super-human union. The word rendered “giants” in Genesis 6:4 is the same word as that found in Numbers 13:33, where it is used to describe the sons of Anak, seen by the spies, and who were gigantic in stature. The Hebrew words designate these giants as “fallen ones.” The result of this union was wickedness of such fearful character as to demand a new beginning of the human race (Gen. 6:5-7).
The Corruption of the Human Race
This corruption of the human race by the “sons of God” was in harmony with Satan’s continued policy of trying to frustrate the plan and purpose of God, and thus answers the question of why these angels sinned. Herein is to be found the cause of their evil act. By influencing these angels to rebel, become insubordinate to God, abandon their first estate, leave their own habitation, and come down into the realm of the daughters of men and seek them out for themselves, Satan aimed at the monstrous destruction of the human race (the channel through which the seed of the woman, Genesis 3:15, should come), and at its immediate perversion, by producing a race of frightful monstrosities.
He almost succeeded. Genesis 6:12 says, “All flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” Only one family remained by the grace of God: Noah’s. Genesis 6:2,4 shows that monstrosities were produced.
The Scriptures reveal that angels fell, came down, and went after strange flesh (Jude 6,7 with 2 Pet. 2:4), and the testimony strongly suggests that their sin was that of Genesis 6. The passage in Jude 6,7 shows the awful sin of the people in Sodom and Gomorrah in comparison with the sin of the angels who fell.
Angels or Not?
Matthew 22:30 is used in refutation of the “angels” view. But in this passage, the words “in heaven” make a great difference with the meaning. The angels in heaven do not marry, nor are given in marriage. But the “sons of God” in Geneses 6:1-4 were no longer in heaven. They left their own place, forsook their habitation, and came seeking after strange flesh, hunting after unlawful alliance with the daughters of men.
Here is just one of the men, with his credentials, that follow the angelic view. I must reiterate that there is NOTHING to suggest the beings in Genesis 6 are human. The text ITSELF distinguishes human women from the beings that took them and mated with them.
Think how utterly silly it would be to say Seth's sons mated with Cain's daughters, and that union created Giants and mighty men.
Dr. Elmer Towns
Dr. Elmer Towns is a college and seminary professor, an author of popular and scholarly works (the editor of two encyclopedias), a popular seminar lecturer, and dedicated worker in Sunday school, and has developed over 20 resource packets for leadership education.His personal education includes a B.S. from Northwestern College in Minneapolis, Minnesota, a M.A. from Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, a Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary also in Dallas, a MRE from Garrett Theological Seminary in Evanston, Illinois, and a D.Min. from Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California.He is co-founder of Liberty University, with Jerry Falwell, in 1971, and was the only full-time teacher in the first year of Liberty’s existence. Today, the University has over 11,400 students on campus with 39,000 in the Distance Learning Program (now Liberty University Online), and he is the Dean of the School of Religion.Dr. Towns has given theological lectures and taught intensive seminars at over 50 theological seminaries in America and abroad. He holds visiting professorship rank in five seminaries. He has written over 2,000 reference and/or popular articles and received six honorary doctoral degrees. Four doctoral dissertations have analyzed his contribution to religious education and evangelism.
Posting again for those who are confused about this:
WERE THE “SONS OF GOD” FALLEN ANGELS?
Several Bible teachers believe that the “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2) which were angels, cohabited with the “daughters of men” (Gen. 6:2), who were human women and produced giants (v. 4). God saw the wicked results, as well as potential ruin and destroyed the earth with a flood. The angels who were responsible were placed in Tartarus to wait for judgment at the Great White Throne judgment. Lawlor gives support for this view.
The Sons of God
The title “sons of God” in Genesis 6:2,4 is used in Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 to designate angels. Moreover, in the Septuagint the word “sons” in these passages is the Greek for “angels,” and where the Authorized Version reads “sons of God” in Geneses 6:2,4 the Septuagint reads “angels of God.” Nowhere in the Old Testament are God’s people called “sons of God,” with one notable exception in Hosea 1:10, and the meaning there is obvious.
The term “sons of God” denotes beings brought into existence by the creative act of God. Such were the angels, and in the Old Testament the title refers to angels. Men are not “sons” until they are redeemed (Gal. 4:4,5), born again in the New Testament sense (Jn. 1:12,13; 3:3-7).
There was a strong Jewish stream of tradition with regard to Genesis 6:1-4 as being the description of a terrible sin committed by angels attracted by the beauty of mortal women, and who forsook their proper habitation in order to live on earth with the daughters of men.
The early church held that Jude’s statement in verse 6 refers to Genesis 6:1-4. It was not until the latter part of the fourth century that any other view was suggested.
The language of the text is foreign to the view that the “sons of God” are the sons of Seth, while the “daughters of men” are the offspring of Cain. If the “sons of God” are the sons of Seth, and the “daughters of men” are the offspring of Cain, then at the time of the amalgamation God’s true people were limited to the male sex, for the “sons of God” were the ones who married the “daughters of men.” And if the “sons of God” were believers, they perished in the Flood, yet Peter states that it was the ungodly who received that judgment (2 Pet. 2:5).
Daughters of Men
The “daughters of men” can surely be held to include the daughters of Seth as well as the daughters of Cain, and this being so, then the “sons of God” must refer to something entirely different from the human race.
The progeny of the union between the “sons of God” and the daughters of men” was of such a character as to indicate a super-human union. The word rendered “giants” in Genesis 6:4 is the same word as that found in Numbers 13:33, where it is used to describe the sons of Anak, seen by the spies, and who were gigantic in stature. The Hebrew words designate these giants as “fallen ones.” The result of this union was wickedness of such fearful character as to demand a new beginning of the human race (Gen. 6:5-7).
The Corruption of the Human Race
This corruption of the human race by the “sons of God” was in harmony with Satan’s continued policy of trying to frustrate the plan and purpose of God, and thus answers the question of why these angels sinned. Herein is to be found the cause of their evil act. By influencing these angels to rebel, become insubordinate to God, abandon their first estate, leave their own habitation, and come down into the realm of the daughters of men and seek them out for themselves, Satan aimed at the monstrous destruction of the human race (the channel through which the seed of the woman, Genesis 3:15, should come), and at its immediate perversion, by producing a race of frightful monstrosities.
He almost succeeded. Genesis 6:12 says, “All flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” Only one family remained by the grace of God: Noah’s. Genesis 6:2,4 shows that monstrosities were produced.
The Scriptures reveal that angels fell, came down, and went after strange flesh (Jude 6,7 with 2 Pet. 2:4), and the testimony strongly suggests that their sin was that of Genesis 6. The passage in Jude 6,7 shows the awful sin of the people in Sodom and Gomorrah in comparison with the sin of the angels who fell.
Angels or Not?
Matthew 22:30 is used in refutation of the “angels” view. But in this passage, the words “in heaven” make a great difference with the meaning. The angels in heaven do not marry, nor are given in marriage. But the “sons of God” in Geneses 6:1-4 were no longer in heaven. They left their own place, forsook their habitation, and came seeking after strange flesh, hunting after unlawful alliance with the daughters of men.
First, see the connection in Job 38. The morning stars are part of the sons of God. Revelation defines stars as angels.
Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Revelation 1:20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.
Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Revelation 1:20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.
In that exact phrasing yes, but we do see such passages as Psa. 82, which present the same idea. “You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High.” (ū-ḇə-nê kul-lə-ḵem.) Also Hosea 1:10, “Yet the number of the sons of Israel will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered; And in the place where it is said to them, 'You are not My people,' It will be said to them, 'You are the sons of the living God.'" (bə-nê ’êl-) In both of these instances, man is the subject.
The seven angels of Rev 1:20 are not angelic beings, they are the ministers of the seven Churches. The book of Revelation was not written to angels. It was written to the seven Churches. It causes a great deal of confusion to some when the translators arbitrarily translate ἄγγελοι as angels rather than messengers, which is what the word means.
J
It is from the Codex Alexindrinus:
Here is just one of the men, with his credentials, that follow the angelic view. I must reiterate that there is NOTHING to suggest the beings in Genesis 6 are human. The text ITSELF distinguishes human women from the beings that took them and mated with them.
Think how utterly silly it would be to say Seth's sons mated with Cain's daughters, and that union created Giants and mighty men.
Dr. Elmer Towns
Dr. Elmer Towns is a college and seminary professor, an author of popular and scholarly works (the editor of two encyclopedias), a popular seminar lecturer, and dedicated worker in Sunday school, and has developed over 20 resource packets for leadership education.His personal education includes a B.S. from Northwestern College in Minneapolis, Minnesota, a M.A. from Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, a Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary also in Dallas, a MRE from Garrett Theological Seminary in Evanston, Illinois, and a D.Min. from Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California.He is co-founder of Liberty University, with Jerry Falwell, in 1971, and was the only full-time teacher in the first year of Liberty’s existence. Today, the University has over 11,400 students on campus with 39,000 in the Distance Learning Program (now Liberty University Online), and he is the Dean of the School of Religion.Dr. Towns has given theological lectures and taught intensive seminars at over 50 theological seminaries in America and abroad. He holds visiting professorship rank in five seminaries. He has written over 2,000 reference and/or popular articles and received six honorary doctoral degrees. Four doctoral dissertations have analyzed his contribution to religious education and evangelism.
Posting again for those who are confused about this:
WERE THE “SONS OF GOD” FALLEN ANGELS?
Several Bible teachers believe that the “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2) which were angels, cohabited with the “daughters of men” (Gen. 6:2), who were human women and produced giants (v. 4). God saw the wicked results, as well as potential ruin and destroyed the earth with a flood. The angels who were responsible were placed in Tartarus to wait for judgment at the Great White Throne judgment. Lawlor gives support for this view.
The Sons of God
The title “sons of God” in Genesis 6:2,4 is used in Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 to designate angels. Moreover, in the Septuagint the word “sons” in these passages is the Greek for “angels,” and where the Authorized Version reads “sons of God” in Geneses 6:2,4 the Septuagint reads “angels of God.” Nowhere in the Old Testament are God’s people called “sons of God,” with one notable exception in Hosea 1:10, and the meaning there is obvious.
The term “sons of God” denotes beings brought into existence by the creative act of God. Such were the angels, and in the Old Testament the title refers to angels. Men are not “sons” until they are redeemed (Gal. 4:4,5), born again in the New Testament sense (Jn. 1:12,13; 3:3-7).
There was a strong Jewish stream of tradition with regard to Genesis 6:1-4 as being the description of a terrible sin committed by angels attracted by the beauty of mortal women, and who forsook their proper habitation in order to live on earth with the daughters of men.
The early church held that Jude’s statement in verse 6 refers to Genesis 6:1-4. It was not until the latter part of the fourth century that any other view was suggested.
The language of the text is foreign to the view that the “sons of God” are the sons of Seth, while the “daughters of men” are the offspring of Cain. If the “sons of God” are the sons of Seth, and the “daughters of men” are the offspring of Cain, then at the time of the amalgamation God’s true people were limited to the male sex, for the “sons of God” were the ones who married the “daughters of men.” And if the “sons of God” were believers, they perished in the Flood, yet Peter states that it was the ungodly who received that judgment (2 Pet. 2:5).
Daughters of Men
The “daughters of men” can surely be held to include the daughters of Seth as well as the daughters of Cain, and this being so, then the “sons of God” must refer to something entirely different from the human race.
The progeny of the union between the “sons of God” and the daughters of men” was of such a character as to indicate a super-human union. The word rendered “giants” in Genesis 6:4 is the same word as that found in Numbers 13:33, where it is used to describe the sons of Anak, seen by the spies, and who were gigantic in stature. The Hebrew words designate these giants as “fallen ones.” The result of this union was wickedness of such fearful character as to demand a new beginning of the human race (Gen. 6:5-7).
The Corruption of the Human Race
This corruption of the human race by the “sons of God” was in harmony with Satan’s continued policy of trying to frustrate the plan and purpose of God, and thus answers the question of why these angels sinned. Herein is to be found the cause of their evil act. By influencing these angels to rebel, become insubordinate to God, abandon their first estate, leave their own habitation, and come down into the realm of the daughters of men and seek them out for themselves, Satan aimed at the monstrous destruction of the human race (the channel through which the seed of the woman, Genesis 3:15, should come), and at its immediate perversion, by producing a race of frightful monstrosities.
He almost succeeded. Genesis 6:12 says, “All flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” Only one family remained by the grace of God: Noah’s. Genesis 6:2,4 shows that monstrosities were produced.
The Scriptures reveal that angels fell, came down, and went after strange flesh (Jude 6,7 with 2 Pet. 2:4), and the testimony strongly suggests that their sin was that of Genesis 6. The passage in Jude 6,7 shows the awful sin of the people in Sodom and Gomorrah in comparison with the sin of the angels who fell.
Angels or Not?
Matthew 22:30 is used in refutation of the “angels” view. But in this passage, the words “in heaven” make a great difference with the meaning. The angels in heaven do not marry, nor are given in marriage. But the “sons of God” in Geneses 6:1-4 were no longer in heaven. They left their own place, forsook their habitation, and came seeking after strange flesh, hunting after unlawful alliance with the daughters of men.
Here is just one of the men, with his credentials, that follow the angelic view. I must reiterate that there is NOTHING to suggest the beings in Genesis 6 are human. The text ITSELF distinguishes human women from the beings that took them and mated with them.
Think how utterly silly it would be to say Seth's sons mated with Cain's daughters, and that union created Giants and mighty men.
Dr. Elmer Towns
Dr. Elmer Towns is a college and seminary professor, an author of popular and scholarly works (the editor of two encyclopedias), a popular seminar lecturer, and dedicated worker in Sunday school, and has developed over 20 resource packets for leadership education.His personal education includes a B.S. from Northwestern College in Minneapolis, Minnesota, a M.A. from Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, a Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary also in Dallas, a MRE from Garrett Theological Seminary in Evanston, Illinois, and a D.Min. from Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California.He is co-founder of Liberty University, with Jerry Falwell, in 1971, and was the only full-time teacher in the first year of Liberty’s existence. Today, the University has over 11,400 students on campus with 39,000 in the Distance Learning Program (now Liberty University Online), and he is the Dean of the School of Religion.Dr. Towns has given theological lectures and taught intensive seminars at over 50 theological seminaries in America and abroad. He holds visiting professorship rank in five seminaries. He has written over 2,000 reference and/or popular articles and received six honorary doctoral degrees. Four doctoral dissertations have analyzed his contribution to religious education and evangelism.
Posting again for those who are confused about this:
WERE THE “SONS OF GOD” FALLEN ANGELS?
Several Bible teachers believe that the “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2) which were angels, cohabited with the “daughters of men” (Gen. 6:2), who were human women and produced giants (v. 4). God saw the wicked results, as well as potential ruin and destroyed the earth with a flood. The angels who were responsible were placed in Tartarus to wait for judgment at the Great White Throne judgment. Lawlor gives support for this view.
The Sons of God
The title “sons of God” in Genesis 6:2,4 is used in Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 to designate angels. Moreover, in the Septuagint the word “sons” in these passages is the Greek for “angels,” and where the Authorized Version reads “sons of God” in Geneses 6:2,4 the Septuagint reads “angels of God.” Nowhere in the Old Testament are God’s people called “sons of God,” with one notable exception in Hosea 1:10, and the meaning there is obvious.
The term “sons of God” denotes beings brought into existence by the creative act of God. Such were the angels, and in the Old Testament the title refers to angels. Men are not “sons” until they are redeemed (Gal. 4:4,5), born again in the New Testament sense (Jn. 1:12,13; 3:3-7).
There was a strong Jewish stream of tradition with regard to Genesis 6:1-4 as being the description of a terrible sin committed by angels attracted by the beauty of mortal women, and who forsook their proper habitation in order to live on earth with the daughters of men.
The early church held that Jude’s statement in verse 6 refers to Genesis 6:1-4. It was not until the latter part of the fourth century that any other view was suggested.
The language of the text is foreign to the view that the “sons of God” are the sons of Seth, while the “daughters of men” are the offspring of Cain. If the “sons of God” are the sons of Seth, and the “daughters of men” are the offspring of Cain, then at the time of the amalgamation God’s true people were limited to the male sex, for the “sons of God” were the ones who married the “daughters of men.” And if the “sons of God” were believers, they perished in the Flood, yet Peter states that it was the ungodly who received that judgment (2 Pet. 2:5).
Daughters of Men
The “daughters of men” can surely be held to include the daughters of Seth as well as the daughters of Cain, and this being so, then the “sons of God” must refer to something entirely different from the human race.
The progeny of the union between the “sons of God” and the daughters of men” was of such a character as to indicate a super-human union. The word rendered “giants” in Genesis 6:4 is the same word as that found in Numbers 13:33, where it is used to describe the sons of Anak, seen by the spies, and who were gigantic in stature. The Hebrew words designate these giants as “fallen ones.” The result of this union was wickedness of such fearful character as to demand a new beginning of the human race (Gen. 6:5-7).
The Corruption of the Human Race
This corruption of the human race by the “sons of God” was in harmony with Satan’s continued policy of trying to frustrate the plan and purpose of God, and thus answers the question of why these angels sinned. Herein is to be found the cause of their evil act. By influencing these angels to rebel, become insubordinate to God, abandon their first estate, leave their own habitation, and come down into the realm of the daughters of men and seek them out for themselves, Satan aimed at the monstrous destruction of the human race (the channel through which the seed of the woman, Genesis 3:15, should come), and at its immediate perversion, by producing a race of frightful monstrosities.
He almost succeeded. Genesis 6:12 says, “All flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” Only one family remained by the grace of God: Noah’s. Genesis 6:2,4 shows that monstrosities were produced.
The Scriptures reveal that angels fell, came down, and went after strange flesh (Jude 6,7 with 2 Pet. 2:4), and the testimony strongly suggests that their sin was that of Genesis 6. The passage in Jude 6,7 shows the awful sin of the people in Sodom and Gomorrah in comparison with the sin of the angels who fell.
Angels or Not?
Matthew 22:30 is used in refutation of the “angels” view. But in this passage, the words “in heaven” make a great difference with the meaning. The angels in heaven do not marry, nor are given in marriage. But the “sons of God” in Geneses 6:1-4 were no longer in heaven. They left their own place, forsook their habitation, and came seeking after strange flesh, hunting after unlawful alliance with the daughters of men.
LOL. The primary meaning of the word is messenger. It is generally applied to supernatural beings. At times in the NT, it is translated as angel when it is clearly referring to human messengers. Rev 1:20 is such a case as is 2 Cor 11:14.
Stars is used in apocalyptic language to represent rulers of governments.
Stars is used in apocalyptic language to represent rulers of governments.
As many that are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. Flesh gives birth to flesh .The Holy Spirit give birth to spirit life.
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
Believer have the power of the holy Spirit in their bodies of death it is not of them .
As many that are led by the spirit of the antichrist (Satan) are antichrists . The division is between the true believer and the one that looks another source of faith other than as it is written in the law and the prophets .
Lying spirits have no ability to procreate they must find an earthen vessel to try and draw men away for the faith of Christ as that which comes from hearing God. You would need two people man and woman to both be deceived. the portion of scripture is simply not to be unevenly yoked Sons of god with daughters of men natural unconverted mankind . The Holy Spirit we as simply presevering the spiritual seed "Christ", the genealogy was still be fulfilled it was needed for that one time demonstration .
We simply do not wrestle against the things seen like flesh and blood .And neither are we supported by it The procreation as far as a new creatures is not affect by the corrupted flesh .It must die and return to the dust of the field .
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
Believer have the power of the holy Spirit in their bodies of death it is not of them .
As many that are led by the spirit of the antichrist (Satan) are antichrists . The division is between the true believer and the one that looks another source of faith other than as it is written in the law and the prophets .
Lying spirits have no ability to procreate they must find an earthen vessel to try and draw men away for the faith of Christ as that which comes from hearing God. You would need two people man and woman to both be deceived. the portion of scripture is simply not to be unevenly yoked Sons of god with daughters of men natural unconverted mankind . The Holy Spirit we as simply presevering the spiritual seed "Christ", the genealogy was still be fulfilled it was needed for that one time demonstration .
We simply do not wrestle against the things seen like flesh and blood .And neither are we supported by it The procreation as far as a new creatures is not affect by the corrupted flesh .It must die and return to the dust of the field .
O
Not at all. I am saying, if a good angel would volunteer for such a task as to put a lie into the mouth of these prophets, then that is the same as God putting the lie into the mouth of these prophets. That would make God responsible for creating a lie.
God could have killed this king a million different ways (heart attack - dying in his sleep - falling off something - something falling on him - animal attack - drowning - choking on his food - being poisoned - etc, etc, etc), but instead, God allowed a lie to be created that sent this king into battle which he was killed in.
O
According to WHO, YOU?
I suppose you support the Didache because it specifically points out the trinity which the scriptures do not (I believe in a Triune God - so there is no argument here concerning that). The Didache uses a term however claimed originated by the Apostles that we have never seen in any of our scriptures (Eucharist). Chapter 9 details the Eucharist. In fact, the Didache has so many add ins it's an OBVIOUS FAKE.
The best claim to the Didache, was that it was lost for a 1,000 years hahahahaha - it was never lost - it was being written by the Catholic Satanic Regime before claimed to being a lost book and then found!!
Now concerning Enoch:
The attribution "Enoch the Seventh from Adam" is apparently itself a section heading taken from 1 Enoch (1 En 60:8, Jude 1:14a) and not from Genesis.[20]
Also, it has been alleged that 1 Peter, (in 1Peter 3:19–20) and 2 Peter (in 2Peter 2:4–5) make reference to some Enochian material.[21]
The Book of Enoch was considered as scripture in the Epistle of Barnabas (16:4)[22] and by many of the early Church Fathers, such as Athenagoras,[23] Clement of Alexandria,[24] Irenaeus[25] and Tertullian,[26] who wrote c. 200 that the Book of Enoch had been rejected by the Jews because it contained prophecies pertaining to Christ.[27]
Eleven (11) Aramaic-language fragments of the Book of Enoch were found in cave 4 of Qumran in 1948[33] and are in the care of the Israel Antiquities Authority. They were translated for and discussed by Józef Milik and Matthew Black in The Books of Enoch.[34]
- 4Q201 = 4QEnoch a ar, Enoch 2:1–5:6; 6:4–8:1; 8:3–9:3,6–8
- 4Q202 = 4QEnoch b ar, Enoch 5:9–6:4, 6:7–8:1, 8:2–9:4, 10:8–12, 14:4–6
- 4Q204 = 4QEnoch c ar, Enoch 1:9–5:1, 6:7, 10:13–19, 12:3, 13:6–14:16, 30:1–32:1, 35, 36:1–4, 106:13–107:2
- 4Q205 = 4QEnoch d ar; Enoch 89:29–31, 89:43–44
- 4Q206 = 4QEnoch e ar; Enoch 22:3–7, 28:3–29:2, 31:2–32:3, 88:3, 89:1–6, 89:26–30, 89:31–37
- 4Q207 = 4QEnoch f ar
- 4Q208 = 4QEnastr a ar
- 4Q209 = 4QEnastr b ar; Enoch 79:3–5, 78:17, 79:2 and large fragments that do not correspond to any part of the Ethiopian text
- 4Q210 = 4QEnastr c ar; Enoch 76:3–10, 76:13–77:4, 78:6–8
- 4Q211 = 4QEnastr d ar; large fragments that do not correspond to any part of the Ethiopian text
- 4Q212 = 4QEn g ar; Enoch 91:10, 91:18–19, 92:1–2, 93:2–4, 93:9–10, 91:11–17, 93:11–93:1
Also at Qumran (cave 1) have been discovered three tiny fragments in Hebrew (8:4–9:4, 106).
The Book of Enoch (also 1 Enoch;[1] Ge'ez: መጽሐፈ ሄኖክ mets’iḥāfe hēnoki) is an ancient Jewish religious work, ascribed by tradition to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah.The older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) of the text are estimated to date from about 425 BC!!
Noah, the great-grandson of Enoch, is credited for the writings we find in the Book of Enoch!!
What is most interesting however, we have Yeshua quoting Enoch, Peter uses phrases from Enoch, and Jude specifies who Enoch was.
And YOU (hermit) think it is phony baloney - hahahahahahahahahahahaha
-
1
- Show all
O
And according to the Jews, Noah wrote Enoch's sayings down.
Here is Yeshua quoting Enoch:
Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. (Mat 5:5) The elect shall possess light, joy and peace, and they shall inherit the earth. (Enoch 5:7 {6:9})
the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the son (John 5:22). the principal part of the judgment was assigned to him, the Son of man. (Enoch 69:27 {68:39})
shall inherit everlasting life (Mat. 19:29) those who will inherit eternal life (Enoch 40:9 {40:9})
"Wo unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. (Luke 6:24) Woe to you who are rich, for in your riches have you trusted; but from your riches you shall be removed. (Enoch 94:8 {93:7}).
Ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (Mat. 19:28) I will place each of them on a throne of glory (Enoch 108:12 {105:26})
Woe unto that man through whom the Son of man is betrayed! It had been good for that man if he had not been born. (Mat. 26:24) Where will the habitation of sinners be . . . who have rejected the Lord of spirits. It would have been better for them, had they never been born. (Enoch 38:2 {38:2})
between us and you there is a great gulf fixed. (Luke 16:26) by a chasm . . . [are] their souls are separated (Enoch 22: 9,11{22:10,12})
In my Father's house are many mansions (John 14:2) In that day shall the Elect One sit upon a throne of glory, and shall choose their conditions and countless habitations. (Enoch 45:3 {45:3})
that ye may be called the children of light (John 12:36) the good from the generation of light (Enoch 108:11 {105: 25})
the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. (John 4:14) all the thirsty drank, and were filled with wisdom, having their habitation with the righteous, the elect, and the holy. (Enoch 48:1 {48:1})
Jude quoting Enoch
Jude 1:14-15, quoting Enoch 1:9 {2:1} [1]
"And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
"To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches, which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
These weren't sayings that everyone just automatically knew, they were found in an actual BOOK written before the Messiah was ever prophesied:
O
The best answer I found why the Jews rejected Enoch, written by Noah:
The Book of Enoch was considered as scripture in the Epistle of Barnabas (16:4)[22] and by many of the early Church Fathers, such as Athenagoras,[23] Clement of Alexandria,[24] Irenaeus[25] and Tertullian,[26] who wrote c. 200 that the Book of Enoch had been rejected by the Jews because it contained prophecies pertaining to Christ.[27]
This claims this Book was around the first century, which we know it goes back to when Noah walked the earth. So no one had to quote Enoch from memory, they had his statements already in SCROLL format.
The Book of Enoch was considered as scripture in the Epistle of Barnabas (16:4)[22] and by many of the early Church Fathers, such as Athenagoras,[23] Clement of Alexandria,[24] Irenaeus[25] and Tertullian,[26] who wrote c. 200 that the Book of Enoch had been rejected by the Jews because it contained prophecies pertaining to Christ.[27]
This claims this Book was around the first century, which we know it goes back to when Noah walked the earth. So no one had to quote Enoch from memory, they had his statements already in SCROLL format.
